War, terrorism and crime. These are the headlines fronting Britain’s newspapers today, or on any day.
If editors know how to sell newspapers, then death is their best sales representative. Whether it is war in Iraq, teenagers slaughtered or a missing toddler, the human instinct to learn from gossip and avoid danger is strong enough to maintain an entire industry.
But behind this marketing are some uneasy facts.
According to the Office of National Statistics, every day about 1,400 people die in the UK. Of these, about 440 are from heart disease, 370 are from cancer and 260 are from diseases of the brain or stroke. Beyond that, there is death and great suffering caused by a huge range of other illnesses.
Of the total number of deaths, precisely none are from terrorism this year. Not since 7th July 2005 have people suffered in this way. Then, whilst the 52 victims and their families were part of a great tragedy, the tragedy of 1,400 people dying daily in the UK from other causes is surely as great.
For many years, we as a party have been successful in local elections for the very reason that we have understood what local issues matter to real people on a day-to-day basis, and we have campaigned on them.
Despite being a busy district councillor, I have never met anyone who has lost a loved one through recent wars or terrorism. Fellow members will of course be able to cite examples. Yet every one of us, without exception, can recall sad losses and pain due to “natural” causes. The grandparent suffering with seized joints, the neighbour being supported through Alzheimer’s and the friend who died in an avoidable car accident – these are all family tragedies.
The scale of these tragedies dwarfs anything to do with war or terrorism, and is matched only by the parallel losses felt in other countries around the world.
We are all against the war in Iraq.
We despise this government’s foreign policy.
We are fed up of wave after wave of criminal legislation.
Yet none of this can compare with the real, tangible and at-home issue that is today’s NHS.
Labour’s dismal record on health is a sad yet ideal campaign opportunity. With hospital facilities closing all over the country despite record spending on the NHS, there could hardly be clearer evidence of government mismanagement. This is an area that really matters to people. And it is one where our message is consistently preferred to that of the Tories.
We also have a great track record in setting the pace and developing new policy ideas. The other parties eventually steal our plans, where their membership will allow it, but so often it is our vision that germinates in the minds of politicians of all colours. So let us also be innovative. Let us seek not only to rebuild and strengthen the NHS, but also to begin a battle against suffering that is in true proportion with its scale. Let us favour health and well-being because we know that is what matters so much to ordinary people, every day.
We must build the strongest campaign on health so that more people can enjoy longer, healthier and happier lives. There can be few worthier causes.
* Darren Reynolds is a Lib Dem councillor in Burnley.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Northern Ireland debates the future of its railways in 1957
Church Green video
Thinking of standing for election or re-election next year? Helpful questions to consider
Steve Trevethan
Kira Collins
Daniel Walker
Andrew Tampion
7 Comments
Every day about 1,400 people die in the UK. Of these, about 440 are from heart disease, 370 are from cancer and 260 are from diseases of the brain or stroke.
I’m sorry but this is ridiculous. We have to die of something. My grandfather died of bowel cancer. He was only 86. Shocking, eh? Untimely death will always be more newsworthy than the standard variety. If you were looking for a cause of death to dwarf terrorism, then road accidents would have been a better bet.
“My grandfather died of bowel cancer. He was only 86. Shocking, eh?”
Laurence, are you suggesting that a younger person is worth more than an older person? That you are worth more than your grandfather? That if a young person dies, it’s a tragedy, but if an old person dies, “Who gives a stuff?”
This is a common perception in the west, but I hope that your grandson disagrees with you.
Please don’t demonise me for stating the obvious. Of course it is more tragic if a young person dies. It’s not because a young person is worth more than an old person. It’s because, in the abstract, X years are worth more than Y years, where X > Y.
Your argument is a common fallacy, and one which has been used by many (including Liberal Democrats I’m sorry to say) to exaggerate the risks associated with nuclear power. It has been claimed, for instance, that the number of deaths caused by the Chernobyl accident run into hundreds of thousands. In fact the true figure was around 75. This gross distortion arises from the practice of counting as a “death” anyone whose demise can be attributed to the effects of radiation, even if all this amounts to in reality is a shortening of life expectancy by a few hours. Nuclear power is in fact by far the safest method of power generation, whether or not we choose to include dodgy Soviet technology in the figures.
I do not believe in playing one issue off against another.
Funding the NHS is a very important issue.
International terrorism is also very important. Our security services have done a superb job in preventing a repeat of 7/7.
But that does not mean we should get complacent.
The intention of the 7/7 bombers was not only to kill as many people as possible, it was to destroy the underground system around Kings Cross. If they had succeeded, the economic cost would have been substantial. Fortunately some the lines were closed, and the bombers decided to blow up buses instead. Which was also a terrible outcome of course, but it could have been worse.
One possibility for the future is that the terrorists will use a “dirty bomb”. If they succeed, the damage it would cause would be much worse than 7/7.
Terrorism is a very important issue.
3 – I remember that a few days after Chernobyl The Sun ran the headline ’10 Million Reds Could Die’!
In fact, while the official IAEA/WHO-led report suggests 57 deaths directly attributable to Chernobyl, it also said there were about 4000 cases of thyroid cancer (not necessarily fatal) as a result. But there has been considerable debate, and other reports have suggested much higher cancer levels – up to 200,000.
One of the problems is interpreting data – e.g. separating out the increased rates of cancer attirbutable to Chernobyl from those attributable to the deterioration in post-Soviet healthcare systems. Another is the secrecy associated with the Soviet response.
Unfortunately, the way the NHS works is to try and work out whose life or whose surgery is most valuable.
The NHS is a classic example of the failure of planning – it attempts to allocate scarce resources through central planning – something which does not work on anything other than the very small scale.
Part of our liberal heritage is the recognition that markets distribute scarce resources far better than any planner. Couple that with our commitment to ensuring that nobody suffers from lack of health care due to lack of money we can surely come up with a system which enables individual choice and a market without the failures of the US employment tied insurance system.
I see you are up to your usual tricks Darren, Spouting off then not answering awkward questions.
The reason more people have not been murdered by your terrorist friends is because of our superb security services.
Yes our NHS should do more, But for the British people, Not for the forigners who abuse it, Or the health tourists that you would gladly let use our services to secure a single vote for your party and their pathetic policys most of which are stolen.